RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 391, 24 May 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, TEMUKA.

Monday, May 23, 1881. (Before L Nugent Wood, Esq,, R.M.,.and S. D. Barker, Esq., J.P.) USING. OBSCENE' LANGUAGE. John Breen was charged, on remand from Timaru, with using obscene language on the 16th insif. Ho pleaded guilty. RESISTING THE ROUGE', The same accused was charged with resisting the police whilst in the execution of their duty. He pleaded guilty to-this charge alfeo*. The Bench fined; accused 20s for resisting the police, and 20s for using obscene language. OBSTRUCTING; THE POLICE. O’Brien Mahoney was charged with obstructing the constable whilst the latter was arresting the previous accused. Mahoney pleaded guilty to the charge. Fined 20s or one week’s imprisonment in the gaol at Timaru. ASSAULT. John Ereen was charged with having on the 17th instant unlawfully assaulted and beaten one Jeremiah O’Neill. The complainant deposed that on the 17th inst. he was the worse for liquor, and did not recollect anything about any row. Recollected the doctor dressing some wounds On my head. A witness stated that he was at the hotel on the 17th. Saw accused and complainant having a fight outside. O’Neill challenged Breen to fight. Breen had a closed knife in his hand With the knife in it. Both bled considerabl} 7 . The doctor was sent for. O’Neill had no weapon.

Constable Blirfee deposed to being called on the 17tb., O-’N.eill- was covered with blood. He was cut on the crown of bis head and over the eye, Ha saw him out next morning.

The accused in reply said that he was drunk and did not know anything about

The Bench fined the accused 20a. John. McXnnis was charged with having on the ITth, inst. unlawfully assaulted Joseph Mabn. Mr Harneraley appeared for accused. Constable Burke deposed to arresting accused at 10 p.nu oa the. night of the 17th inst. He said that: he hud not been near the Volunteer Hall nor seen, Mann that night. Joseph Mann, gardener, deposed to knowing accused. Saw him near the Volunteer Hall between 7 and 8 o’clock on the evening of the 17th. He came behind me and remained on the footpath.. I was inside the fence. A short time after a stone struck me on the back of my head, and 1 fell senseless to the ground. I recovered consciousness soon after. The stone came from, the street. There were, several people about. 1 have known, accused since last summer, when at Mr Wareing’s. We were not then good; friends, I have always'tried to keep out of his way. We had quarrelled previously. The witness was. cross-examined by Mr Hamersley at some length. By the Bench,., I didi not see accused throw anything. X am, quite sure he fol lowed me up from the. Post -office to the | HalU I

William Scott, deposed : I recollect being near the Hall on the 17th. Saw a ma!i throw a stone at Mann, who was inside the fence. It was thrown by a man outside the fence. Mann fell down and the other ran away. - Cannot say if the accused was the man- who threw the stone as his face was away from me.. He was about prisoner's height By Mr Hamers!ey.:. li could not tell what kind of a. hat lie had on. It was a dark night,, and a. mam could hardly be recognised five yards off.. William Turner deposed that on the night in.question accused was just outsile the Hall.with a dog. Saw a man hit with a stone and he fell. A man ran away and accused’s dog followed him.

Dr Gumming, deposed ; I examined the ; wound, on the head. of. complainant- It i was a contused-: lacerated: wound* such as could be done with a blunt instrument or ; a stone. Mr flamersley contended that there was not a tittle of evidence that the stone was thrown by accused, and urged that the case be dismissed. The Bench dismissed the case. THREATENING LANGUAGE. Thomas Palmer, was charged with using threatening language towards one Rawlings on the 18th May. MrHamersley defended the accused.. The complainant: deposed being in Resident Magistrate’s Court on the 18th inst, and on going outside accused said he would throw me on the top of the Magistrate, and would ihrow us both, into the creek. A few days after he came to me on my. own land and said my horse was impounded on his land. I. told him he had betterfetch.it back.. He called me several bad names* Mr Hamersley here contended that the information was insufficient inasmuch as no t ffence waa.disclosed therein.. The Bench held- the objection as fatal and dismissed the case. In, another case. Davis v. T. Palmer, in which Mr Hameraley appeared: for defendant, and, on a similar objection raised by Mr Hamersley, it was dismissed. FURIOUS RIDING. James Thomas was charged with having ridden at a furious pace in a public street, on the 18th instant. Accused pleaded guilty and was fined 10s with: costs. CIVIL CASES. R. Richardson v. Stewart—Claim; £34. 5s 6d. The sum of £ol6s was paid into, Court, and there was a set off for £7. Mr Hamersley appeared fbr the plaintiff and Mr Johnston for the defence. This was a disputed aciesmnt for feeding a threshing machine at 20s per 1000 bushels and the set off was also disputed, After a patient hearing of the case the Bench gave judgment for £l4lls 5d with costs and solicitor’s lee in addition to amount paid into court. Brown v. Turpin—Claim £8 11s 4d. Judgment for amount claimed with coats.2os; v Hopkinson v. Palmer—Clairmlls. Mr Johnston appeard. for plaintiff and Mr Hamersley- foe defendant. Tile above amount was claimed for illegal charge for trespass of horses on untenced laud, to recover the Sum paid in " order to get the horses back,, on two occasions. Mr Hamersley admitted that it was not a cattle proof fence, and for the defence called defendant who deposed he did not charge for trespass but for the same price to which he was entitled as if he had driven the horses to the pound He only charged for driving and feed. His Worship reserved his decision till Monday next. A. Colville v. F. Cohn—Claim £3 17s. Mr White appeared for the plaintiff. Judgment for the amount claimed with costs 20s and solicitor’s fee. C- Nicholas v. R. Little—Claim £3 7s, Judgment by default, P. Coira v R. Little—Claim £1 17s. Judgment by default.